z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Peer review declaration
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
iop conference series. materials science and engineering
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1757-899X
pISSN - 1757-8981
DOI - 10.1088/1757-899x/1089/1/011002
Subject(s) - library science , originality , declaration , computer science , publishing , peer review , operations research , world wide web , medical education , medicine , psychology , political science , engineering , law , social psychology , creativity , programming language
All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. ● Type of peer review: Double-blind review ● Conference submission management system: Via mail to EnergoBGTU@mail.ru ● Number of submissions received: 82 ● Number of submissions sent for review: 82 ● Number of submissions accepted: 56 ● Acceptance Rate: 68% ● Average number of reviews per paper: 2 ● Total number of reviewers involved: 24 ● Any additional info on review process: Detailed information of the used peer-review process: The peer-review process includes technical expertise of the submitted papers, external review and paper’s peer review by the program committee. 1. Entry technical expertise. The submitted reports are evaluated by the Chairman of the Program Committee and manager of the organizing committee for compliance with themes of the conference and features of scientific pub-lication. Some papers are checked for originality by way of random fragments searching, usually abstracts and conclusions, in google.com. The papers which are on iThenticate conference hosts are unable to check because of the high cost and the small number of files. The allowed to proceed papers are being distributed to sections. 2. External review. After the technical expertise, the papers are sent to the reviewers which are chosen according to the scientific contacts of the conference hosts. The reviewers are also chosen among the authors of the corresponding section from the previous conferences or based upon analysis of the paper’s literature list. 3. Final scientific expertise. The Chairman of the Program Committee or appointed by him members of the Program Committee conduct the paper’s peer review considering the review. Result of the peer review: a) accept the paper; b) make improvements in the paper according to the stated by the reviewer and Program Committee members remarks; c) decline the paper. ● Contact person for queries: Prof. Pavel Trubaev, trubaev@gmail.com

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here